‘They Denied Me My Trial,’ Suspect Says Evidence Of Victims’ Past Acts Will Not Be Admitted, Judge Rules

Evidence of the character and past bad acts of Ronald and Luella Bingham will not be admitted at Kenneth D. Arrasmith’s trial for their slayings, a judge has ruled.

But Arrasmith’s 16-year-old daughter will be allowed to testify about the alleged sexual torture she suffered at the hands of the Clarkston, Wash., couple, 2nd District Judge Ida Leggett decided Friday.

The ruling essentially guts Arrasmith’s planned defense.

“There is no defense. They denied me my trial,” he said in an interview from the Nez Perce County Jail.

“The only way I’ll be able to survive this is if the people on the jury see through the prosecutor’s horrible scheme to allow these kind of monsters to survive in our society.”

Arrasmith, 44, a Sunnyside, Wash., truck driver and former Asotin County, Wash., sheriff’s deputy, will be tried starting Nov. 6 on two counts of first-degree murder for allegedly killing the Binghams on May 17 outside a Lewiston auto repair shop.

Bingham was shot 23 times as he lay under a truck and Mrs. Bingham was shot six times in the back as she apparently attempted to flee.

Arrasmith contends the couple sexually tortured his daughter for several weeks last spring, but that authorities did nothing about it after being informed of the alleged crime.

He also wanted to present evidence that the Binghams had a history of sexual abuse of children dating back more than 20 years. Bingham served 18 months in prison for a 1984 rape conviction.

Attorney Craig Mosman told Leggett on Thursday that he planned to rely for Arrasmith’s defense on a state law that no one can be put in legal jeopardy for protecting himself or his family by “reasonable means necessary or by coming to the aid of someone he believes is in imminent danger or is the victim of a heinous crime.”

Mosman said after Friday’s ruling that he and his co-counsel would explore their options, which could include an immediate appeal. He said the Idaho self-defense law has never been tested in any state court.

“It either means what it says or you ignore it,” Mosman said. “It’s meaningless to say, ‘This is a self-defense statute, but by the way, you can’t present evidence.”’

Arrasmith, who has not admitted killing the Binghams, said he would not plea bargain with Nez Perce County Prosecutor Denise Rosen. “Right is right,” he said. “I believe there are other parents out there that feel they would defend their children at whatever cost because this judicial system wasn’t protecting them. I’d like to hear from them. I’d like Denise Rosen to hear from them.”

Rosen declined comment on Friday.

Leggett disagreed with Mosman’s arguments that information about the Binghams’ character and actions pertain to the murder charges.

“Ronald and Luella Bingham are not on trial in this case,” she said. “Even if the court were to find this evidence relevant, it is so highly prejudicial that its exclusion is warranted.”

The judge said if she allowed the evidence, the jury “could conclude that the deceased got what they deserved and acquit for that reason.”

Leggett said no proof was offered that Arrasmith was threatened by the Binghams or that they had the ability to attack at the time of the shootings, which would go to the issue of self-defense, or that Arrasmith reasonably believed an unnamed girl was living with the Binghams and was in imminent danger, which relates to his claim of protection of others.

As for other alleged victims, some of whom claim the Binghams sexually abused them years ago, their testimony would not be pertinent, Leggett said.

“One cannot come to the aid of a victim when the crime is completed some days, months or years” earlier, the judge said.